I have frequently thought that if we would just get ourselves taught on this issue, emphasizing what the Bible says about the male and female roles, then a meeting of the whole congregation could be conducted in such a way that no one, male or female, would get out of line, and ultimately no one would feel left out of the process. But congregations that have tried this have not always met with positive results. Why? Because although it is certainly lawful for a woman to be in a business meeting of the church, it is not always expedient. The apostle Paul addressed this principle when he said, All things are lawful for me, but all things are not helpful; all things are lawful for me, but all things do not edify (1 Corinthians 10:23).
Being Lawful Doesnít Equate With Expedient
What this means concerning the subject at hand is that although a combined meeting of men and women called to discuss church business is authorized, this does not mean it is mandatory, or even desirable. It all depends upon our attitudes, dispositions and, of course, our understanding of Godís word. Is our collective thinking up to speed on this, brotherhood wise? In other words, do most churches of Christ believe there is a thus sayeth the Lord for congregational business meetings? No. Are there some congregations that think there are? Yes. But even when a congregation concludes it does have authority to do so, even desiring to implement such a policy, are there reasons why such may not be expedient? Yes. For example, due to so many misconceptions that exist concerning this subject (some in the church and others in the culture), is there reason to think that some women might have a tendency to get out of their place in such meetings? And if they do get out of line, will the rest be willing to rebuke them, and take the necessary action if they donít repent of their ungodly behavior? Or, might not a husband try to defend his wife even when it is clear to the rest that she has gotten out of her place? I hope youíre getting my point here. Yes, I believe the Scriptures teach conclusively that congregational business meetings are authorized and, therefore, can be conducted and I would like to see this happen in more churches of Christ but the pertinent question still remains: Is it expedient? Remember, just because something is lawful doesnít automatically mean it is expedient, or that it truly edifies (cf. 1 Corinthians 10:23).
Neither Headship, Oversight, Nor Leadership Authorizes Domination
I am the head of my wife and she, praise God, honors me as her lord (cf. 1 Peter 3:6). However, this does not mean that I run roughshod over her. In fact, I discuss with her every decision that directly impacts her life with me. We work as a husband and wife team. We discuss, or have discussed, most everything that relates to our life and work together. However, as the one who is in subjection, she defers to my judgment, as long as it is consistent with what God teaches in His word. This means that the ultimate authority for this relationship is not Allan Turner it is, instead, Jesus Christ. This means that the delegated authority I have been given as my wifeís head must be exercised in view of the truths revealed in Godís Word. If I do not understand her needs (i.e., if I donít dwell with her according to knowledge, 1 Peter 3:7), then I am not what the Lord requires me to be, and our prayers will be hindered. But how can I understand her if Iím not willing to discuss these needs with her? By the same token, how can the men of the congregation understand the needs of the congregation if they are not discussing these with the women members of the church?
If this is true, and I believe it is, and if elders are supposed to be the kinds of husbands weíve just talked about, then how could an eldership, if one exists, exclude female members of the congregation from discussing the important business of the church? I think the only correct answer is: It couldnít and it wouldnít! However, I have heard that there are elderships exercising their oversight/rule in local churches at the expense of the male members of the congregation, in that they do not even meet with the men of the church to discuss congregational business. This is, in my understanding of things, just plain WRONG!
The apostle Peter, who was himself an elder, instructed elders to: Shepherd the flock of God which is among you, serving as overseers, not by compulsion but willingly, not for dishonest gain but eagerly; nor as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock (1 Peter 5:2-3). Whatís my point? Simply this: If elders are not to be lords of (or masters over) the flock which is among them, how can it be thought wise for them to never have a meeting with the members of the church? Unless the congregation is so small that it would be possible for the elders to discuss the matter with everyone in the church individually before making some major decision, then a business meeting with the church would seem not only appropriate, but sometimes mandatory.
How does this apply to the subject of congregational business meetings? Well, if elders ought not to run roughshod over the men of the congregation by never calling a business meeting with them, then why should those in a menís business meeting feel justified in making significant/major decisions without the valuable input of the women of the congregation? Godly elders do not relinquish oversight of the local congregation when they consult with members in a business meeting anymore than a husband does when he consults his wife and children. Consequently, the men of the congregation do not relinquish their leadership, nor do the women they consult usurp their authority, be it in a business meeting or otherwise.
So, someone says, Okay, then, we wonít object to women being in a business meeting as long as they remain silent. In other words, such will concede to the women being informed by what takes place, but they refuse to permit them to inform the meeting, for to do so, they think, would cause them to either teach over or exercise authority over the men. This could happen, of course, but not necessarily so!
Remember, if you will, that sweet Priscilla, a godly Christian woman, along with her husband, took [Apollos] aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately (Acts 18:26). The KJV and the ASV translate this same Greek word as expounded. Most assuredly, she did this without either teaching [over] or exercising authority over a man (1 Timothy 2:12). Remember, also, that dear sister Phoebe was a servant (a minister, if you will) of the church in Cenchrea (Romans 16:1). Paul asked the church at Rome to receive her in the Lord in a manner worthy of the saints, and [to] assist her in whatever business she has need of you: for she has been a helper of many and of myself also (v. 2). Assuredly, she did this without either teaching [over] or usurping authority over a man (1 Timothy 2:12).
Yes, women may get out of line or out of their place in a meeting of the church to discuss business, and this must be guarded against by all involved. However, even men sometimes get out of line or out of their place in business meetings, and this is no less sinful than if women were to do so. Perhaps a reading of Philippians 2:1-8 at the start of business meetings would be beneficial to all involved.
Therefore, if there is any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any affection and mercy, fulfill my joy by being like-minded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind. Let nothing be done through selfish ambition or conceit, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than himself. Let each of you look out not only for his own interests, but also for the interests of others. Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a servant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross.
We must learn that when the apostle Paul said: Let nothing be done through selfish ambition [strife] or conceit [vainglory]; but in lowliness of mind [humility] let each esteem others better [more significant] than himself, he wasnít simply making a suggestion. He was, instead, giving a direct command! Christians are plainly taught to submit...one to another in the fear of God (Ephesians 5:21). Such godliness would eliminate the attitudes that wreak havoc in too many menís business meetings, as it would with congregational business meetings, as well.
Authority Comes With Tremendous Responsibilities
My position/role with reference to the exercise of authority does not dictate my significance. The world may reason this way, but the gospel teaches that our glory, our worth, is measured by our personal conformity to Jesus Christ as Lord of our lives. Feminism argues that a woman cannot be a serious person unless she occupies a position of headship/authority. This kind of thinking does not come from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish (James 3:15). It reflects the mass stampede for power, recognition, status and prestige we see all around us in a lost and dying world. But the worldís reasoning is invalid. Authority does not authenticate me as a person made in the image of God. Authority is not a privilege to be exploited to build up my ego. Authority is a responsibility one bears for the benefit of others without regard for one's self. This is the Christian view. In other words, my personal significance is not measured according to my rung on the ladder. Neither is my opportunity for personal fulfillment enlarged or diminished according to the role I have been assigned. If it is, then the goal of life degenerates into competition for power, and when this happens, then no one hungers and thirsts for the true fulfillment that comes only from doing righteousness. The ancient preacher said, Let us hear the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep His commandments, for this is the whole duty of man (Eccles. 12:13). Godly submission honors and glorifies God just as much as godly authority, and neither of these is easier than the other. For a woman to learn godly submission and for a man to learn godly leadership takes devotion and work. Devoted to God and the male-female roles He ordained, we work hard to exemplify these roles to the glory of God.
Contrary to what some think, the Bible does not teach that men are superior and that women are inferior. Thus, manís authority is a responsibility, a God-given trust, for the good of all. It is not a right of man to exercise for his own self-exaltation or ego-satisfaction. And it is not so much a prerogative as it is a calling. It is, in fact, a duty, an obligation, a charge that God has given to man. It is unfortunate that sin has distorted both masculinity and femininity. Consequently, it is only in Christ that one can expect to learn what mature masculinity and mature femininity are all about.
Authority, whether in the home or church, is vested in men. However, any and all power associated with such authority recedes before its responsibility. In Matthew 20:25-26, the Bible says: But Jesus called them to Himself and said, ‘You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them. Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant.í Therefore, mature Christian masculinity views leadership/authority as an obligation to be borne (a sacred duty to be discharged for the good of others, if you will), not simply as a right to assert or power to exercise.
In conclusion, and in consideration of 1 Corinthians 14:40, which says, Let all things be done decently and in order, it seems prudent that a meeting called to address the business of a church without elders would benefit from (1) an agenda of business to be discussed and (2) a presiding chairman to facilitate the meeting. If executed well, these would provide a means for all things to be done decently and in order. But to exclude women from such meetings, as is often done today, and to do so arguing that the Scriptures require it to be done this way, is simply not Scriptural, in that it cannot be demonstrated that the Bible teaches any such thing!
However, and as Iíve already mentioned, a congregational meeting of men and women to discuss business, although Scriptural, may simply not be deemed expedient. In that case, and consistent with the prohibitions of 1 Timothy 2:11-12, a menís business meeting could be conducted. But because we are compelled to arrive at our conclusions by consensus, then how could it be appropriate to make decisions that affect a whole congregation without first considering what the women are thinking? I donít think it can be, unless you buy into the argument that a menís business meeting is the ruling entity for the church. However, and as Iíve pointed out in this series of articles, the Bible makes it clear that this is a function reserved for the eldership, and not a group of lesser qualified men. Therefore, some means will be necessary for feeling the pulse of the women who make up the congregation. In other words, it is important not only that the women are being told after the fact what happens in the menís business meeting, but that they have genuine input prior to decisions being made.
If, then, women are not going to be allowed in the meeting, or if in the meeting they are not permitted to speak, then it seems reasonable/expedient that the men could assign a man to meet with the women prior to the menís meeting, so as to make sure they had a feel for what the women were thinking, and all this for the ultimate purpose of reaching a consensus. The male, who would chair the meeting, could then report to the men what the women thought about the business matters at hand. This would require, or so it seems to me, an agenda of business to be provided to these women before or during their meeting. Then, not only would the women of the congregation be informed as to decisions that were being made, but they would also have genuine input into the decision making process, so that when a decision is finally made, it would indeed be by consensus.
In a congregation without elders, this is, in my judgment, the only scriptural avenue available. By only scriptural avenue, I do not mean the particular plan I have set forth here. What I mean is that, in lieu of elders, it seems to me that the only scriptural avenue we have open to us is to arrive at our decisions by consensus. To doubt, as some do, that a consensus is possible, one must lack faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ in shaping the hearts of both men and women. It is my prayer that the Lord will help us do His will in His way.
Please, think seriously about what Iíve said. And as you do, understand that in the absence of a humble spirit of love and mutual concern, there are no rules of order that can make a church without elders function for the Lord as He would have it. As Christians, our task, without sacrificing the truths taught in Godís word, is to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace (Ephesians 4:3). Without elders, a church is, at best, still lacking (Titus 1:5). All who make up such a church should be determined to be the kind of men and women who will one day allow them to appoint, from among themselves, godly men who will be both qualified and willing to take the oversight of the church, as God intended. They must be praying for and working toward that day, and the Lord will surely bless them as they endeavor to do His will in all things.
May the good Lord bless us all as we continue to humbly study His word.
(Allan Turner is a preacher, writer, editor who lives in Corinth, MS. He has his own web site located at http://allanturner.com and is the editor of this on-line magazine. You can write him at firstname.lastname@example.org.)